The replication crisis in social psychology has been ongoing for several years now. The crisis was brought on by the attempted replication of 100 social psychology studies of which only 1/3 replicated. This sent the field into a panic and caused social psychologists to reevaluate their scientific methodology and incentive structures.
Unfortunately, that may have all been for naught. An elite group of Harvard psychologists have attempted to replicate the results of the infamous 100 of which 1/3 failed to replicate studies of the replication crisis. To their surprise, the attempt to replicate the replication crisis did itself not replicate, casting doubt on the entire replication crisis.
“If the replication crisis didn’t replicate, then how we can even trust social psychology at all? Nothing ever replicates, not even our failure to replicate,” said Dr. Ron Fisher, who once won the award for ‘Smartest at Harvard’. “This shows that our failures even fail to fail, our defeats aren’t even self-defeating. What kind of science is this? I want answers.”
Once the funding is available, Dr. Fisher and several other Harvard psychologists plan on attempting to replicate the failed replication of the replication crisis.
NOTES: To replicate a study means to do the same study again (same methodology, same hypothesis, same statistical analysis). If a study gets the same result it did the first time it was run, it is considered replicated. If it doesn’t get the same result the quality of the research is questionable and may be deemed unscientific. A lot of foundational social psychology experiments have not replicated. This has prompted a range of reactions from social psychologists, prompting a new age of methodological skepticism and meta-skepticism.